Title:The end of the line Director: Rupert Murray Release year:2009 What is the central argument or narrative of the film? The central argument of the film is the reduction in population of ocean fish. 90% of the fishes are gone. In past, Canada caught many codfish, which result a very few codfish left today. Local catching of fish is declining, but the total fish catching is going up. Blue fin tuna catching declined 80% in last 10 years. Large-scale fishing started in 1950s. There are too many boats with a lot of equipments are used to catch fish. 1.4 billion Hooks are used every year that could encircle the globe more than 550 times. Fishermen are using a lot of nets too. Blue fins are very expensive. Therefore fishermen are catching a lot of blue fin tuna. Because of high rate of catching, the number is decreasing. The film mentioned how fishermen and big fishing companies don’t abide the fishing rules. In Europe, scientist recommended to catch 15 thousand ton of blue fins, but politician said 29.5 thousands ton to catch. In Malta, fishermen ignored the regulation and caught 61 thousand ton blue fin tuna. In West Africa Senegal, fish are declining massively What sustainability problems does the film draw out? The film mentioned many sustainability problems. Extinction of species and change in ecosystem are two important one. When some population decreases, it helps to increase in other population. In North Carolina, Increased in ray population, when the shark predator declined. After Cod population decreased, shrimp population as well as Jellyfish, algae, plankton, and worms increased. Local fishers are suffering, because of trade fishing right. Rich countries paid a lot of tax money to catch further areas. Restaurants are serving the fish that are in danger. Many fishes are caught get wasted because the big fishing companies are only interested in certain type of fish. 10th of caught fish got wasted. Faming fish is a bad solution because many wild fishes are feed for one farm fish. If the rate of fishing continues, by 2048 all the fish population will collapse. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why? There are many compelling part in this film. I have learned a lot about fish problem. Mitsubishi, the making company of cars and many other electronics hold the largest company in tuna business. They do not catch, but buy them. They hold 60% of blue fin tuna. They are sending out larger boat to catch more. They are reserving and building fish stock of blue fin tuna. They will catch until the last fish remain. Another interesting part, China reported wrong about catching fish. They always made up numbers. They used to over report in the past, now they report less than what they catch. I love what Alaska is doing for fishing. The state is controlling 200-mile of fishing limit. They do not allow new boat to enter. Fishing boats are monitored and number of fishing is recorded. Scientist sets catch limit and it is below the danger zone. The authority give fishermen limited amount of time to fulfill their needs. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why? The film was able to attract a lot of attention, but the film did not mentioned about the regulations of selling various kinds of fish. Some big corporate are trying to be sustainable. It is funny to me because they are the one who is creating the problems. What audiences does the film best address? Why? This is a good film to watch, because many people are not aware of the fishing industries and how their food habits are harming the ecosystem. There are some blood scene in the film. Therefore, young children will probably not a good group to watch this film. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value? The film could have mentioned about the distinction of the water life not only because of the fishing, but also from the pesticides, fertilizers and other chemicals. The film could have mentioned about the mercury level in fishes. They could have compared the mercury level in big fishes and small fishes. What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective. The film suggests many solutions for this problem. The amount of fishing in a specific place should be controlled by the suggestions of scientists. Consumers should know about the fish, where it comes from, why it is in danger. Consumer should label health effects. Small amount of fish comes from sustainable sources. 40% fish are caught to feed farm fish. Marine reserve is for 1%. Other Unprotected areas needed to be controlled too. Politicians have to act responsibly when making decision. Consumer need to change their eating habits. Global fishing industry has to abide by the rule and reduce its capacity. What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out? After knowing the fishing system in Alaska, made me curious about the NY state fishing rules. Albany, NY falls under region 4. In this region, all species are allowed to catch all year but that have to be returned to the water immediately. There are limitations in the area of catching fish and the numbers of fishes catch per day, length of the fish, types of fishes, and the method of catching fishes are limited based on the area for fishing. http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/fish_marine_pdf/fishguide10b.pdf
Director: Rupert Murray
Release year: 2009
What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The central argument of the film is the reduction in population of ocean fish. 90% of the fishes are gone. In past, Canada caught many codfish, which result a very few codfish left today. Local catching of fish is declining, but the total fish catching is going up. Blue fin tuna catching declined 80% in last 10 years. Large-scale fishing started in 1950s. There are too many boats with a lot of equipments are used to catch fish. 1.4 billion Hooks are used every year that could encircle the globe more than 550 times. Fishermen are using a lot of nets too. Blue fins are very expensive. Therefore fishermen are catching a lot of blue fin tuna. Because of high rate of catching, the number is decreasing. The film mentioned how fishermen and big fishing companies don’t abide the fishing rules. In Europe, scientist recommended to catch 15 thousand ton of blue fins, but politician said 29.5 thousands ton to catch. In Malta, fishermen ignored the regulation and caught 61 thousand ton blue fin tuna. In West Africa Senegal, fish are declining massively
What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
The film mentioned many sustainability problems. Extinction of species and change in ecosystem are two important one. When some population decreases, it helps to increase in other population. In North Carolina, Increased in ray population, when the shark predator declined. After Cod population decreased, shrimp population as well as Jellyfish, algae, plankton, and worms increased. Local fishers are suffering, because of trade fishing right. Rich countries paid a lot of tax money to catch further areas. Restaurants are serving the fish that are in danger. Many fishes are caught get wasted because the big fishing companies are only interested in certain type of fish. 10th of caught fish got wasted. Faming fish is a bad solution because many wild fishes are feed for one farm fish. If the rate of fishing continues, by 2048 all the fish population will collapse.
What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
There are many compelling part in this film. I have learned a lot about fish problem. Mitsubishi, the making company of cars and many other electronics hold the largest company in tuna business. They do not catch, but buy them. They hold 60% of blue fin tuna. They are sending out larger boat to catch more. They are reserving and building fish stock of blue fin tuna. They will catch until the last fish remain. Another interesting part, China reported wrong about catching fish. They always made up numbers. They used to over report in the past, now they report less than what they catch. I love what Alaska is doing for fishing. The state is controlling 200-mile of fishing limit. They do not allow new boat to enter. Fishing boats are monitored and number of fishing is recorded. Scientist sets catch limit and it is below the danger zone. The authority give fishermen limited amount of time to fulfill their needs.
What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?
The film was able to attract a lot of attention, but the film did not mentioned about the regulations of selling various kinds of fish. Some big corporate are trying to be sustainable. It is funny to me because they are the one who is creating the problems.
What audiences does the film best address? Why?
This is a good film to watch, because many people are not aware of the fishing industries and how their food habits are harming the ecosystem. There are some blood scene in the film. Therefore, young children will probably not a good group to watch this film.
What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
The film could have mentioned about the distinction of the water life not only because of the fishing, but also from the pesticides, fertilizers and other chemicals. The film could have mentioned about the mercury level in fishes. They could have compared the mercury level in big fishes and small fishes.
What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.
The film suggests many solutions for this problem. The amount of fishing in a specific place should be controlled by the suggestions of scientists. Consumers should know about the fish, where it comes from, why it is in danger. Consumer should label health effects. Small amount of fish comes from sustainable sources. 40% fish are caught to feed farm fish. Marine reserve is for 1%. Other Unprotected areas needed to be controlled too. Politicians have to act responsibly when making decision. Consumer need to change their eating habits. Global fishing industry has to abide by the rule and reduce its capacity.
What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out?
After knowing the fishing system in Alaska, made me curious about the NY state fishing rules. Albany, NY falls under region 4. In this region, all species are allowed to catch all year but that have to be returned to the water immediately. There are limitations in the area of catching fish and the numbers of fishes catch per day, length of the fish, types of fishes, and the method of catching fishes are limited based on the area for fishing.
http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/fish_marine_pdf/fishguide10b.pdf